GUILTY OR - Whitney Heichel, 21, Gresham, 16 Oct 2012 #5

[newsjunkie]

Are the margins totally blown out on this page for anyone else?

I think it has to do with large map pics further up on the page.

Advice?

Thanks in advance;-)

For me it was a page back. Sorry I don't have any advice, I just grin and bear it until the next page.

 

[AvalonBlue]

No worries. Happens often. Larger pics do blow the margins. All will be good and back to normal when we get to the next page.

Thanks, Bravo! :seeya:

Things look back to normal now.

 

[Bravo]

Thanks, Bravo! :seeya:

Things look back to normal now.

Your welcome. And welcome if i haven't yet done so :seeya:

 

[Joe Friday]

If you hold down the Crtl key and push the minus (-) button it might bring the margins back.

It works for my on Ebay when someone puts on a huge picture.

 

[Xavier]

[QUOTE=PoirotryInMotion;8560496]Telephone pole mystery solved! Thought I'd remembered someone posting this pic earlier:

So, thoughts:

IF the phone was on the berm next to the turnout, then it was tossed there, it didn't accidentally fall out of someone's pocket during the murder. But why tossed there that Tuesday morning, if trying to get rid of it, rather than into the trees across the road, which would have hidden it much more permanently?

*And why the need to get rid of it if turned off, and the last call/info transaction he'd had on it was 6:08 AM when presumably he was still up in the Gresham area--with no connection to the murder site? If turned off, no ping.

Okay, I'm off to look for the 'threw it into the lake' article...[/QUOTE]

Good points....IMO You gotta remember, Holt just committed a horrific murder. Maybe the first time he did this. He shot WH 4 times, head and chest shots. So his rage, violent mental state was pretty high.

Factor in during the drive back to town, possibly Holt was getting calls from his employers, his parents, maybe his wife all wanting to know why he did'nt go to work...

I'd seriously think he did'nt give a darn about anyone or anything else at the moment of pitching the cell phone, so to just get rid of the "annoying, hassling" phone calls, he just threw it out spontaneously, not giving second thoughts if it would be found implicating him to the crime...To me this makes the most psychological sense.

JMO

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

Telephone pole mystery solved! Thought I'd remembered someone posting this pic earlier:

<snipped by me>

So, thoughts:

IF the phone was on the berm next to the turnout, then it was tossed there, it didn't accidentally fall out of someone's pocket during the murder. But why tossed there that Tuesday morning, if trying to get rid of it, rather than into the trees across the road, which would have hidden it much more permanently?

*And why the need to get rid of it if turned off, and the last call/info transaction he'd had on it was 6:08 AM when presumably he was still up in the Gresham area--with no connection to the murder site? If turned off, no ping.

Okay, I'm off to look for the 'threw it into the lake' article...

Good points....IMO You gotta remember, Holt just committed a horrific murder. Maybe the first time he did this. He shot WH 4 times, head and chest shots. So his rage, violent mental state was pretty high.

Factor in during the drive back to town, possibly Holt was getting calls from his employers, his parents, maybe his wife all wanting to know why he did'nt go to work...

I'd seriously think he did'nt give a darn about anyone or anything else at the moment of pitching the cell phone, so to just get rid of the "annoying, hassling" phone calls, he just threw it out spontaneously, not giving second thoughts if it would be found implicating him to the crime...To me this makes the most psychological sense.

JMO

But remember...JH wasn't getting calls on his phone. When Amanda went to cancel his phone service Tuesday night, AT&T records showed that last call/info transaction on his phone was at 6:08 AM that morning. Then it was likely turned off, because 30 more calls tried to make it through, but did not--went to voicemail as though service was off.

From kodi's post above:

As for JH's cell, per the PDF, the only usage in his log was the 6:08am call to Starbucks. There were 30 other phone calls made to his phone that day, none of which connected, indicating the phone was not receiving calls or service. (PDF pg. 17)

So, IMO, JH turned his phone off after he placed the call to Starbucks or sometime soon after. Interestingly enough, his GPS location isn't noted, one way or the other.

So if he threw his phone on the berm, it wasn't because it was ringing and bothering him. It was there for some other reason.

 

[newsjunkie]

Have we heard what kind of phone WH had? If CH was a iPhone owner, maybe WH was too. It's possible he saw a phone lying there on the seat or console and tossed it, and then didn't realize until later that he tossed his (CH's old) phone instead of WH's.

Then, of course, creating the need to toss WH's phone out later when he realized it was still with him. Doing so in the same fashion he tossed out all the other evidence along the way.

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

Newsjunkie, I think I remember reading in the PDF that WH had a "smart phone" (generic term for iPhone--though not necessarily that brand).

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

Have we heard what kind of phone WH had? If CH was a iPhone owner, maybe WH was too. It's possible he saw a phone lying there on the seat or console and tossed it, and then didn't realize until later that he tossed his (CH's old) phone instead of WH's.

Then, of course, creating the need to toss WH's phone out later when he realized it was still with him. Doing so in the same fashion he tossed out all the other evidence along the way.

In thinking about this, though, I'm pretty sure if JH kidnapped WH, he wouldn't have left her phone on the seat. It would probably have been pocketed by him early on, so that she wouldn't try to use it and phone for help. In fact, my guess is he wouldn't have had his phone on the seat for the same reason.

 

[newsjunkie]

Newsjunkie, I think I remember reading in the PDF that WH had a "smart phone" (generic term for iPhone--though not necessarily that brand).

I never noticed the term smartphone used, but it most definitely was since there was a data usage report from AT&T.

Either way I guess whether it is an iPhone or Android phone is another question we won't have an answer to anytime soon.

 

[newsjunkie]

In thinking about this, though, I'm pretty sure if JH kidnapped WH, he wouldn't have left her phone on the seat. It would probably have been pocketed by him early on, so that she wouldn't try to use it and phone for help. In fact, my guess is he wouldn't have had his phone on the seat for the same reason.

Still possible then that he could have tossed the wrong phone at the scene, and when hers started going off again he had to toss it elsewhere.

 

[Xavier]

Respectfully, I still believe the clean up (after moving the body to the back floor, or temporarily removing it from the car) was done prior to gassing up and prior to the trip up Larch Mountain. Just far too much risk to pull into an attendant-served gas station with a car full of blood, etc. and the window gone. For someone to have been shot at point-blank range 4 times in that front seat...well, not to get too graphic, but the amount of traumatic evidence visible through that open window would have been tremendous, and alarming. (Remember, the description we read about, bad as it was, was what was visible AFTER the clean up.) No way I'd have risked driving into town with an open window and meeting with attendants at more than one gas station without at least a cursory clean up.

There'd be no need to clean up a hopelessly bloody car on the mountain prior to abandoning it at the far end of a well-lit, well-populated, 24-hr-video-surveilled parking lot. He wasn't trying to keep the car from being found, in other words. And he wasn't trying to keep it from having blood evidence for LE in it, as he obviously knew he hadn't cleaned it up thoroughly enough to prevent that finding. (I'm sure he saw the 2' x 3' pool of blood on the floor of the back seat when he pulled the body out.)

Yeah PIM, there are so many " HOLTISMS" of stupid behavior in how he carried out this crime. The gas stops were Huge Risks, almost idiotic at the least.

1. Holt should've worn gloves to eliminate finger prints.

2. Once at Dodge Park, your aerial photos show high grassy fields, even Sasq mentioned No Trespassing Signs, so doubtful folks would venture around that area anymore.
So why not drive the SUV back into the fields, or hidden areas, do the murder, then clean up SUV, put WH's belongings, cell phone in a trash bag and take it with him.. Then take off the SUV vehicle ID # (VIN) on the inner dashboard, remove both license plates. This would conceal the owner's identity for awhile at least.

3. Holt then could walk thru the fields, much less noticed by people, until he gets far away from the crime scene. Then walk the roads towards town.

4. If Holt wanted to get rid of the cell phones, why not get a rock and smash them and scatter the pieces everywhere, somewhere in the fields far from the crime scene.

JMO, this would seem the easiest way to do this crime, and possibly Holt could've been scot free at this point and not sitting in jail. But, he made too many "Holtisms" and got caught.

Holt now back home, could've made up the robbery on the way to the bus stop at the MAX -- I think that what someone said -- and never made it to work, since he was "shaken up" by the incident.
The robbery lie could be his alibi or just said he fell ill going to the bus stop and needed to rest for awhile. Then called in sick to his employers.

If Holt put on his gloves sometime after leaving finger prints in the SUV, then if he's a registered gun owner, I think the Oregon bureaus of firearms/LE could get his prints off the registered gun owners database.

But, f he did it this way, IMO he could've pulled this crime off. But, luckily for all concerned, Holt's poor planning made it easier for everyone.

 

[Xavier]

I am curious why JH told LE that he "threw the cell phone into the lake" -- but after confessing Friday, and even taking LE to the crime scene that night, he didn't say also, "and here's the phone, which I didn't throw into the lake, but instead dropped at the telephone pole." That berm that the telephone pole is on is very, very small (see picture in previous pages), and the cell phone could easily have been pointed out that night while the officer was copying down the numbers on the two strips stapled to the pole. Instead, JH said nothing about the phone. LE returned the next morning to conduct the search -- and found it right there near the pole. In clear sight of anyone who drove onto the turnout. So...

1) why did he get rid of the phone in the first place?
2) if he thought it was evidence that needed to 'disappear' why would he drop it right there at the pole instead of pitching it into the woods across the street?
3) why would he tell LE he "threw it in the lake" when there is no lake even visible at that location anymore?

PIM--- Yeah, you have some good points. It's so idiotic that Holt seemed to leave evidence Clearly Visible as if inviting the evidence to be discovered easily?

And Holt should've had his INNER RADAR on High alert after the 1st, 2cd LE interviews, knowing he likely would be tailed under surveillance. Then he does another idiotic move and got caught disposing of evidence.

I still would love to see the Shell gas videos and try to see who the passenger was in the SUV.
IMO There's no way WH was in the passenger seat slumped over with the gas attendant standing nearby the SUV. So who was riding in the SUV as claimed by the gas attendant? That's the mystery question I believe.

 

[Xavier]

Yay! I figured out how to multi-quote my first try! :rocker: I probably should snip for space...but let me enjoy the moment, please. *chuckles*

Okay, I've spent the morning going through the PDF again and this is what I found.

In regards to WH's cell, the first communication (specifically listed in the PDF) was from a call received in at 7:06am from Starbucks and the last communications were 3 text messages 9:07am per her logs from AT&T. Of the received calls noted, there are two (7:07am and 8:23am) that do not have GPS locations and of those two calls, one (7:07am) went to VM while the other (8:23am) did not. (PDF pgs. 10 & 11)

I'm unsure of the significance of this, if any, but I am curious about it. Does it mean her phone was turned off or was there a temporary break in service? I pulled up a coverage map for AT&T and have tried my best to compare it to a google map of the area and JH's account of what transpired that terrible day. I think the information could certainly support some of his account, or dispute it. BTW, I still think it's possible he could've found the time to go through her cell during the early hours of her abduction. JMO, of course.

AT&T Coverage Map: http://www.wireless.att.com/coverag...5.4735931640625&lon=-122.11118930664064&sci=6

As for JH's cell, per the PDF, the only usage in his log was the 6:08am call to Starbucks. There were 30 other phone calls made to his phone that day, none of which connected, indicating the phone was not receiving calls or service. (PDF pg. 17)

So, IMO, JH turned his phone off after he placed the call to Starbucks or sometime soon after. Interestingly enough, his GPS location isn't noted, one way or the other.

I had another thought as I was perusing...

JH took the Scion to work on the day before and sent AH a text at 2:33pm letting her know he put $20 of gas in the car and then he picked her up from work later that evening at 5:15pm. (PDF pg. 17) So it's possible, IMO, he had nearly three hours that afternoon to himself.

Perhaps he used this time to prepare some? Maybe do a test drive? Or leave items at a location ahead of time anticipating his need of them? That being said, he also could've spent the afternoon fixing his motorcycle or simply said that's what he did - AH said it wasn't unusual for him to take her car because his bike wasn't working and he didn't want to to ride in the rain - he didn't take his bike Monday but then took it Tuesday (or led her to believe it anways by removing it from the porch).

I'm just trying to think outside the box.

Good points Kodi--- If Holt's cell phone had 30 incoming calls on it, that's alot of calls. IMO the calls were from his employers, his parents, his wife, maybe JW search team members calling Holt to volunteer for WH's search.
That would be a shock for Holt to see that text.

Now that you've validated a lot of calls were on Holt's cell phone, so I believe he saw several calls coming in during the Dodge Park murder site, so in an act of spontaneity, frustration, anger, Holt just casually throws out his cell phone via ride back to town.

Think of Holt's mindset.

He just brutally murdered some one he knew and probably cared about. The last thing he wanted was contact from the real world, so to rid himself of the hassling, irritating phone calls, he decides to "chuck it" spontaneously on the roadside berm. This makes the most psychologial sense to me.

 

[Xavier]

But remember...JH wasn't getting calls on his phone. When Amanda went to cancel his phone service Tuesday night, AT&T records showed that last call/info transaction on his phone was at 6:08 AM that morning. Then it was likely turned off, because 30 more calls tried to make it through, but did not--went to voicemail as though service was off.

From kodi's post above:


So if he threw his phone on the berm, it wasn't because it was ringing and bothering him. It was there for some other reason.

Goo dpoint sPIM---- Is it possible for a cell phone that's turned off, to still see the caller ID"s? If this is possible, then it makes sense to me Holt wanted to get rid of his phone from the annoying calls from the real world?

Also, on this thought, maybe Holt thought he threw out WH's phone thinking it was his phone, which maybe was still turned on or possibly if it was off, then maybe you can see the caller ID's on a turned off cell phone.

 

[Xavier]

Sasquatch, I'm interested in the "white utility vehicles" - have heard one described by LE as being in the Walmart parking lot parked next to Whitney's car at one point.

Also thought I remembered seeing a white truck in a random Google or Bing photo of that Walmart parking lot. I'm going to see if I can crop it and make it bigger and get your opinion on if that is the sort of truck everyone is talking about.

PIM--- I'm thinking if it was a utility vehicle owned by the local utilities companies, as has been claimed, it would've had the "DUKE ENERGY or PGE "company logo on it. No one's mentioned the vehicle belonged to any company.

Now bear in mind, many service oriented companies have white utility vehicles for deliveries, on site work orders, repairs, etc....

 

[newsjunkie]

[/B]

Good points PIM---- Is it possible for a cell phone that's turned off, to still see the caller ID"s? If this is possible, then it makes sense to me Holt wanted to get rid of his phone from the annoying calls from the real world?

Also, on this thought, maybe Holt thought he threw out WH's phone thinking it was his phone, which maybe was still turned on or possibly if it was off, then maybe you can see the caller ID's on a turned off cell phone.

No, when a phone is turned off, it is off. No caller ID, no data usage, no GPS, nothing. When you turn it back on, you sometimes don't even know you had missed calls unless they leave a voicemail.

 

[Quester]

Wow! Almost like an ongoing concerted effort to confuse, muddy, twist and spew nonsense about the facts as they are known to date. Why?

 

[Xavier]

[QUOTE=PoirotryInMotion;8560496]Telephone pole mystery solved! Thought I'd remembered someone posting this pic earlier:

So, thoughts:

IF the phone was on the berm next to the turnout, then it was tossed there, it didn't accidentally fall out of someone's pocket during the murder. But why tossed there that Tuesday morning, if trying to get rid of it, rather than into the trees across the road, which would have hidden it much more permanently?

*And why the need to get rid of it if turned off, and the last call/info transaction he'd had on it was 6:08 AM when presumably he was still up in the Gresham area--with no connection to the murder site? If turned off, no ping.

Okay, I'm off to look for the 'threw it into the lake' article...

Good points....IMO You gotta remember, Holt just committed a horrific murder. Maybe the first time he did this. He shot WH 4 times, head and chest shots. So his rage, violent mental state was pretty high.

Factor in during the drive back to town, possibly Holt was getting calls from his employers, his parents, maybe his wife all wanting to know why he did'nt go to work...

I'd seriously think he did'nt give a darn about anyone or anything else at the moment of pitching the cell phone, so to just get rid of the "annoying, hassling" phone calls, he just threw it out spontaneously, not giving second thoughts if it would be found implicating him to the crime...To me this makes the most psychological sense.

JMO[/QUOTE]


Good points PIM--- Holt easily could've thrown the phone into the heavy wooded areas to conceal it. Instead, the phone's placed in clear visibility, which is another mystery why Holt places the cell phone and lots of other evidence to be easily discovered?

 

[PoirotryInMotion]

Agree and thanks to the poster who pointed out that the phone was not found in the turnout, but rather, on the berm.

<snipped>

Yes, thanks! For some reason I had that telephone pole photo image in my mind and kept thinking when I read the pdf that the 'berm' must mean the small grassy island the pole was sitting on. I couldn't tell from that picture's angle that the actual berm was a berm.